Network News

Get the Morning Fix and the new Afternoon Fix delivered to your inbox or mobile device for easy access to the top political stories of the day. All you need is one click to get Morning Fix and Afternoon Fix!

Assessing the Bob Bennett fallout

Utah Sen. Bob Bennett could lose his bid for re-election this weekend at the state Republican convention. AP Photo/Harry Hamburg

Utah Sen. Bob Bennett's (R) defeat at his state party convention over the weekend immediately produced a huge reaction nationally -- a response that both overestimates and underestimates the impact of the loss.

First, the overestimation.

It's hard to make too many direct extrapolations from the situation in Utah to the situation in the country at large due to the Beehive State's unique nominating process.

Roughly 3,500 people who comprise the most activist (read: conservative) segment of the party base make the candidate choices in Utah and have shown a tendency -- Rep. Jason Chaffetz's upset of then Rep. Chris Cannon in 2008 being an example -- to throw out incumbents who they felt were insufficiently loyal to party principles.

And, unlike other states like Colorado and Connecticut -- both of which have caucus and/or convention processes built into their nominating calendar -- there is no recourse for a Utah politician to qualify for the ballot if he or she doesn't meet the minimum requirements at the convention.

"It is the only state in America where you don't have a way to get on the ballot for the primaries unless you go through a convention process," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) on ABC and the Washington Post's "Topline" program today. (McConnell, a close personal friend of Bennett, also said that "Utah and the nation has lost an outstanding conservative Republican senator.")

Now, the underestimation.

Politicians are, by their nature, a reactive species. They are elected on the strength of their ability to sympathize with and channel voter sentiment, and, as a result, live in constant fear of losing touch with voters and subsequently being hoisted on their own petard. (Shakespeare reference! Who says the Fix is not high brow?)

A loss by someone like Bennett -- three term Senator, reliable conservative, McConnell confidant, well regarded by members of both sides -- sets off alarm bells across the chamber as Members contemplate their own fates.

That's especially true on the Republican side where the rise of the Tea Party movement has put establishment politicians on notice -- not just in the defeat of Bennett but in the circumstances that led up to Florida Gov. Charlie Crist's (R) party switch last month.

Ed Rogers, a longtime Republican strategist, called Bennett's loss "proof that the tea party movement is huge presence in the GOP organization," adding: "All incumbents are on notice don't get cozy with the establishment, don't try to rationalize your support for the Washington takeovers of anything."

Jon Lerner, a Republican consultant to the Club for Growth -- the organization that led the effort to oust Bennett -- compared the message sent over the weekend to the defeat of Sen. Joe Lieberman in a Democratic primary in 2006.

"In 2006, Democratic primary voters would not tolerate support for the Iraq War, even from an otherwise reliably Democratic senator," said Lerner. "In 2010, Republicans do not tolerate support for bailouts, big government health care, and unapologetic earmarking, even from an otherwise reliably Republican senator."

While the uprising of the Republican base against the party establishment has received the most attention, it's also worth noting that a similar -- if less vocal -- dynamic is playing out for Democrats as well.

To wit: Utah Rep. Jim Matheson failed to break the 60 percent barrier at the state Democratic convention this weekend -- attacked by little known Claudia Wright as too conservative for his vote against President Obama's health care bill.

While Matheson should win the June 22 primary comfortably -- it will be a larger and less liberal electorate and he will have a massive money edge -- the fact that he couldn't secure the nod at the convention for the first time since being elected in 2000 shows that Republicans are not alone when it comes to dealing with the anti-incumbent sentiment among base voters.

Another interesting test of the strength of that anti-incumbent feeling will come tomorrow as longtime Rep. Alan Mollohan (D) seeks to fend off a serious challenge from state Sen. Mike Oliverio that most party strategists see as a jump ball.

A Mollohan defeat -- coming on the heels of Bennett's loss and within days of primaries next week where Sens. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) and Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) are fighting for their political lives -- has the potential to send politicians into a frenzy.

Thanks for providing such a curtly expressed example of contempt for the Constitution.

Now a word about the importance of the principles of liberty and freedom...

Consider the following nation pairs: East Germany and West Germany (pre-unification), North Korea and South Korea, Haiti and the Dominican Republic, Palestine and Israel. It appears there is a direct relationship between national prosperity and the extent of individual freedoms. So it would seem that turning away from the principles at the heart of the Constitution is more likely to lead to subhuman squalor than the other way around.

Thanks for providing such a curtly expressed example of contempt for the Constitution.

Now a word about the importance of the principles of liberty and freedom...

Consider the following nation pairs: East Germany and West Germany (pre-unification), North Korea and South Korea, Haiti and the Dominican Republic, Palestine and Israel. It appears there is a direct relationship between national prosperity and the extent of individual freedoms. So it would seem that turning away from the principles at the heart of the Constitution is more likely to lead to subhuman squalor than the other way around.

But of course, after a hundred years of contempt for and abuse of the Constitution by those who should have known better, the government has assumed almost boundless power along with the theoretical right to do anything it deems “necessary”.! So much for the principles of liberty and freedom.

==

It's far preferable that we sink into subhuman squalor and die like diseased dogs than compromise the purity of the almighty Constitution.

It should be noted that the “foregoing Powers” where specifically enumerated and very, very, (and it's worth repeating) very limited in scope. In fact, the point of writing the document we call the Constitution was to definitively limit the “Powers” of the federal government while granting it just enough latitude to form a viable union.

But of course, after a hundred years of contempt for and abuse of the Constitution by those who should have known better, the government has assumed almost boundless power along with the theoretical right to do anything it deems “necessary”.! So much for the principles of liberty and freedom.

That is at the heart of why Sen. Bennett was dismissed, I think. There are very few in Congress who understand the concept of limited government. Sen. Bennett was apparently not one of them.

@WillSeattle: true, but we also have one of the nuttiest state GOP partiesnin the nation, the one that nominated Pat Robertson (!) for president and Ellen Craswell for governor. And we have the eastern part of the state that at least when I was living there was in favor of nuclear war for Hanford jobs.

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language.. And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.'

'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language.. And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.'

If there are problems with the Constitution then propose an amendment. But that doesn't mean Congress gets to just ignore it.

That goes for both parties.

I get the picture that neither party is concerned with their oath of office to defend the constitution. Republicans create social rules, like defining marriage and Democrats pass economic rules like forcing people to buy health insurance.

Almost every problem this nation is facing is caused by the fact that the Federal government no longer follows its own rules.

Problems are supposed to be handled by the states. The Federal government handles wars, treaties, borders, and interstate and foreign commerce, and that's about it.

The states get everything else. Which is what the 10th amendment says.

The Federalist system is what made the nation great for so many years. Now that we have abandoned that principle, the nation is in decline. Returning to it will restore it.

Aaron Gabrielson

Posted by: aaron_gabrielson
-----
You left out one clause in Section 8 written the Constitution that give the Federal government leeway- To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the
foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of
the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
and lets not forget the SCOTUS rulings.

Bennett's loss was months in the waiting because of mood of the electorate and may not bode well for both parties. Many have said they intend to get rid of Hatch come 2012.
==========

Bush and Paulson intelligently rescue us from dire economic consequences with a successful but unpopular Bailout which included partial nationalizing our banks, insurance
and auto companies, call Obama a socialist
and blame him for policies enacted in Dec 2008.

Posted by: leichtman1
------
Actually, Paulson made it more expensive than it really is because he change course after telling Congress what needs to be done by actually backing into it rather than going forward articulating a clear plan. Don't forget Goldman Sach's Dan Jester has his fingers in the pie as well. It is the same for Geithner dealing with A.I.G in the fall.

Overall it is correct that the Republicans do blame Obama for the bailout despite the fact that Bush signed the legislation himself. But don't forget, they take credit for bringing home the beacon despite the fact they voted against it. It bit contradiction on them.

Bennett's loss was months in the waiting because of mood of the electorate and may not bode well for both parties. Many have said they intend to get rid of Hatch come 2012.
==========

Bush and Paulson intelligently rescue us from dire economic consequences with a successful but unpopular Bailout which included partial nationalizing our banks, insurance
and auto companies, call Obama a socialist
and blame him for policies enacted in Dec 2008.

Posted by: leichtman1
------
Actually, Paulson made it more expensive than it really is because he change course after telling Congress what needs to be done by actually backing into it rather than going forward articulating a clear plan. Don't forget Goldman Sach's Dan Jester has his fingers in the pie as well. It is the same for Geithner dealing with A.I.G in the fall.

Overall it is correct that the Republicans do blame Obama for the bailout despite the fact that Bush signed the legislation himself. But don't forget, they take credit for bringing home the beacon despite the fact they voted against it. It bit contradiction on them.

"Bennet needed to go. the new face of the Republican party is the face of Ronald Reagan. He won all but one state when he ran for reelection as a conservative. That is where Republicans are headed and they will bring back the Reagan years!!"

I sincerely hope not! Saint Ronnie with his trickle down economics was the one who started us on the downslope to the economy crashing in 2008. And with his "break up the unions, they are eee-vil" bull, he began the disenfranchisement of the middle class. Not only that, he was such a hypocrite about the unions. After all, he was the president of the Screen Actors Guild (actors union)not once, but twice. But unions are eee-vil.

No, we do not want a rerun of the Saint Ronnie days, nor do we want another astrologer telling us how to run the country, as Nancy was using one for advice as she attempted to cover up Ronnie's Alzheimer's. His strong point was that he was charismatic. There was really nothing else there.

If there are problems with the Constitution then propose an amendment. But that doesn't mean Congress gets to just ignore it.

That goes for both parties.

I get the picture that neither party is concerned with their oath of office to defend the constitution. Republicans create social rules, like defining marriage and Democrats pass economic rules like forcing people to buy health insurance.

Almost every problem this nation is facing is caused by the fact that the Federal government no longer follows its own rules.

Problems are supposed to be handled by the states. The Federal government handles wars, treaties, borders, and interstate and foreign commerce, and that's about it.

The states get everything else. Which is what the 10th amendment says.

The Federalist system is what made the nation great for so many years. Now that we have abandoned that principle, the nation is in decline. Returning to it will restore it.

37th could be CLOSETLY A BEDWETTER.
He needs to come
CLEAN
on this BEDWETTER rumor!!!!
The PUBLIC deserves to know because I don't think we can take 37th's opinion seriously here on anything until we KNOW if he is a BEDWETTER or not.
I have heard that he is a BEDWETTER, just not "OPENLY A BEDWETTER" and I think he needs to set the record straight on this
BEDWETTER
issue

.

And I hope that 37th understands how being a BEDWETTER would not affect a Supreme Court Justice's abilities as a Justice.

The right's ongoing efforts to cast the execrable Senator from Likkud, Joe Lieberman, as "an otherwise reliable Democratic Senator" would be entertaining if the media didn't keep buying this characterization. Here's a hint: when a Senator campaigns for the other party's presidential candidate, he is not reliable "otherwise" or in any way. He is a backstabbing weasel, as the Democratic voters of Connecticut perceived first.

Bennet needed to go. the new face of the Republican party is the face of Ronald Reagan. He won all but one state when he ran for reelection as a conservative. That is where Republicans are headed and they will bring back the Reagan years!! Go for it GOP. Americans dont want Democratic Socialism with no jobs no prosperity and in November that will come through at the ballot box.

@brigade - According to Jim Gilmore, "Mark Warner is an elite, limousine liberal that has gone out there and said one thing to get elected... and then broke his word to the people of Virginia." Hey, it's not me sayin' that. It's your guy.

and yet Gabriel you never answered my basic question. Why should other Utah taxpayors
Bail YOU out when you arrive at the Salt Lake
E.R. Uninsurred?Interesting how you totally skirted that question or delusionally believe it never happens. Somehow you demand that your fellow taxpayors pick up YOUR UNINSURRED TAB. nice but many of us are fed up with your whining just as R Govs in Miss and Louisian now whine to Obama to be bailed out. It goes both ways.
and its not $50 trillion that is c+++ and its my mom not my gm.
Didn't hear a SINGLE CONSERVATIVE
complain when Tom DeLay and Hastert kept the
House vote open for 6 hours. When Ds made your same complaint about demanding that Congress pay for Medicare Part D and suggested scaling back the 2001 tax cut or cancel a couple of F-35s,they were told by the GOP leadership to shut up and get in line that they would keep the vote open as long as neccessary to get their way. Where was all of the GOP protesting in 2005? Thought so.

Sorry but your crocodile tears to balance the budget should have been yelled at POTUS Bush when he was handed a $100 billion dollar budget surplus in 2001 and D were lectured that
a trillion dollar unpaid for tax cut and 2 wars were quite alright with the GOP.

YOUR FAUX OUTRAGE does not work here.
You are about 9 years late in making your faux arguments about the budget.

And will your GOP candidates be signing the GOP
End Medicare and SS pledge?

leichtman wrote: We get it 37th she was picked by Obama so you hate her.
---------------------------------------
Actually, I disagree with that. 37th hates US. If he cared about what Kagan is/is not, he wouldn't sit on this blog 24/7 asking us. He'd be out there needling Robert Gibbs. He'd be pounding on the White House doors. Does he do anything that requires him to leave his keyboard? No, he does not.

He sits in front of his keyboard, pounding on us, demanding that we answer his questions. We're the people he hates.

any chance of this absolute garbage waste of
time screaming back in forth here, about who is a racist, will ever come to an end?
Its just as boring as wasted time with your speculating about Kagan's sexual preference.

NO ONE CARES !

We get it 37th she was picked by Obama so you hate her. You stated that the day before she was even chosen.
Move on and get over yourself importance.
Curious if conservatives here think that
Orrin Hatch and conservatives get to choose
the SCT nominee for Obama. No its not going to be Ted Olson or AG Cuccinelli. Somehow it has just not gotten through to them that they lost
the 2008 POTUS election and mysteriously
they delude themselves into thinking
otherwise.

Funny, the document was defective from the start, requiring amendments and a war or two, to say nothing of a few moral issues like slavery ... Yet when it comes to your grimy handful of cash then it's Moses' tablets.

Utah will send a caveman to the Senate, hurting your state. I hope they refuse to seat him.

For those who want to know whether Elena Kagan is gay--go ask someone who knows. Is there anyone on this blog who knows? No.

You have a right to ask your question.

Go to the White House, beat on the doors, and demand to know.
Go to Kagan's house, sit on the curb, and holler your question.
Go to Congress during hearings and interrupt the hearings and point your finger into her face and say "Are you GAY???????"

leichtman1, I am glad your grandma saved $3000 on her medication because of Medicare Part D. I think paying for old peoples medicine is a fine idea if you have the money. Unfortunately, the promises we have made for social security, medicare and medicaid are over $50 Trillion in the hole. Currently, people in China are lending us the money to pay for grandma's medicine. Who will pay for it when they stop lending us the money? The tooth fairy?

I don't have a problem with social programs when the money is in the bank. Making my kids pay back huge loans for stuff we want today is not fair. If we want to pay for all this stuff, lets be honest about it and have massive tax hikes to pay for it.

I criticized Bennett for voting for Medicare Part D because creating new social programs when you have no way of paying for the current ones seems sort of irresponsible doesn't it?

And yes I have read Wyden-Bennett. Great idea if States want to do it, like in Massachusetts, but unfortunately the Constitution doesn't allow the Federal government to force people to buy stuff.

I never said it was all TP rallies. But if you want to try to convince me or anyone that some TP rallies are hotbeds of unopposed bigotry and the rest of them are pure as the driven snow you have a long row to hoe.

Pretty damned weak argument, dude. A bunch of right wingers who hate the president but that's OK they're not ALL bigots. Thin as a Chinaman's tea.

Brigade, I don't need to convince anyone of f uck-all. You can go google on here and using the words "embellishment" and "racism" and you'll find posts of mine going back fifteen years saying the same god damn thing. To the point of 37-esque repetitive tedium.

You can split hairs over whether or not all or some or a few TP rallies featured racist expression. I really don't give a god damn about petty quibbles like that.

"how much respect did the democrats show Bush??" you don't want to hear this but way
more than he deserved. Personally I was just thankful we made it through his miserable 8 years; in Dec 2008 I was not so certain.
Ds voted for everyone of his trillion plus tax cuts, 2 wars,his SCT nominees, right wing federal judiciary, tolerated his AG politicizing the nonpolitical Justice Dept and "his" $900 billion $ bailout. We were lied to about Iraq and our leaders just stood there like whimps and took it. Same when the economy spun out of control in Sept 15, 2008 and nearly sent us into a 1929 era depression. Valerie Plame incident would have gotten any other VP in history impeached, but again Ds just put up with it for 8 years don t think you really want to go there tonight. Nuff said.

"People are crying racism every time someone expresses racism. I don't see anyone crying racism at people angry at deficit spending, or at people angry over HCR."

Oh, where have you been, my blue-eyed son?

"This is something I've been adamant about for decades: I never call racism when there's a need for embellishment or inference, because there's plenty of the unambiguous real thing out there."

Are you trying to convince me? Or yourself?

"Of course it's possible to disagree with Obama on non-racist grounds; I'm totally at odds with escalating in Afghanistan, at not closing Gitmo, at the (now dead) call to increase offshore drilling, at all kinds of disappointing decisions. His race has nothing to do with this."

Now, if you will just realize that Republicans and Independents can also disagree with Obama on non-racist grounds.

"But the pictures I've seen of TP rallies show Obama as a monkey, with a bone in his nose, all kinds of blatantly and unambiguously racist attacks."

I'm not defending those. But I think it's safe to say they are an exception and not a rule. You've a long way to go to convince me that most of the TeaParty rallies feature this sort of nonsense, if for no other reason than it works against
the protestor and does no harm whatsoever to Obama.

"You want to equivocate over stuff like that, fine, I've conlcuded from this and from stuff like your deficit post that you're not honest here. So be it."

she opposes gay marriage.
As to abortion conservatives only want
politicians involved b/c they can't get
their way in the courts. My rabbi disagrees
with the pope about abortion and yet
conservatives who abhore govt intervention want
exactly to tell me, my family and rabbi what is best on abortion as well as having govt intervene in the family's decision in an advanced directive to physicians
in Fla. That makes almost as nuch sense as
suzy whining that Kagan didn't use quotas in selecting her staff. Sounds like conservatives
here don't know what they want tonight, other
than to have their way and tell us precisely
who Obama HAS to pick on to be on the SCT.

brigade interestingly it is one particular
conservative at this site that screams racism
in bold type every 3 minutes, certainly not me.
I steer away frm using that term and honestly
recall very few mentions of it by POTUS.

you deplore those preprinted TeaParty signs
depicting Obama in whiteface(and I am sure
you are aware of that depiction used in 1930s
about blacks). How about my calling those types of signs deplorable, disrespectful, and totally inappropriate but curious why TeaParty speakers don't simply say on the podium to take those d+++ stupid signs down. Unfortunately such reasonable actions would strengthen their cause. just saying it was done to bush begs the question. as you know I didn't support Obama in the primaries but today he is MY(OUR) POTUS regardless and should be treated with respect regardless of your political affiliation. Calling him berry is equally deplorable but there is no sense disgussing that with some of those here with little minds who haven't come to terms yet with their losing the 2008 election.

People are crying racism every time someone expresses racism. I don't see anyone crying racism at people angry at deficit spending, or at people angry over HCR. That's a shibboleth. And if it wasn't already beaten to death, 37th has flayed it to bare bones.

This is something I've been adamant about for decades: I never call racism when there's a need for embellishment or inference, because there's plenty of the unambiguous real thing out there. Of course it's possible to disagree with Obama on non-racist grounds; I'm totally at odds with escalating in Afghanistan, at not closing Gitmo, at the (now dead) call to increase offshore drilling, at all kinds of disappointing decisions. His race has nothing to do with this.

But the pictures I've seen of TP rallies show Obama as a monkey, with a bone in his nose, all kinds of blatantly and unambiguously racist attacks. You want to equivocate over stuff like that, fine, I've conlcuded from this and from stuff like your deficit post that you're not honest here. So be it.

Since someone brought Kagan into the thread:
I'm hearing that she is on record as saying gay marriage is an issue that should be left to the politicians---that there is no such constitutional right.
Sane people say the same thing about abortion.

kind of shocking to hear Rs now complaining
that someone Didn't use hiring quotas.
Some how we mistakenly believed that
conservatives hate quotas and prefer
hiring the most qualified propsects
regardless of skin color. Our Mistake.

Conservatives whining and demanding
quotas, now that is hilarious suzy.

The next think we will hear from you is
how sorely disappointed you are that she didn't get her law degree from Regent Law School.

I am watching Bill O'Reilly's program as I type this on Monday evening.

Why am I NOT surprised that he has not given a mention, not one mention of Bennett's defeat and the role that the Tea Party movement played in his defeat.

And why am I NOT surprised that he is NOT asking so-called Washington outsider Newt Gingrich why he gave his support via TV ads and much more to Bennett. Gingrich once again has proven that he is a Washington insider who supports Washington insiders.

Given how Fox News, O'Reilly, Beck and Hannity have glorified the Tea Party movement, one would have thought that they would all be doing a dance that the Tea Party has spoken by removing Bennett and essentially removing Crist from contention.

"obviously brigade has missed the plethora
of identical signs showing up at every TeaParty rally with the image of Obama
in whitemakeup, and swastikas, hitler mustaches, mao references and the words socialist emblazened upon them. Other disgusting TeaParty signs proudly cheering on the death of Ted Kennedy.
I presume brigade you are aware of that disgusting behavior and won't try and
rationalize it as some fringe malcontents.
And if the TeaParty deplores these signs
why aren't their speakers saying take them down immediately why don t wan that kind of garbage here?"

Posted by: leichtman1 | May 10, 2010 8:01 PM

Deplorable and disgusting are different adjectives than racist, which to your credit you did not use. I saw equally disgusting displays directed from the left at George W. Bush. A president has to be able to play with the big boys. Crying racism everytime someone takes a shot at Obama is quite stupid and disingenuous.
There are bigots in the world. If he can't stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen. To Obama's credit, he seems to be able to take the whole thing in stride much better than his supporters, who may well suffer from the common liberal malady known as the soft bigotry of low expectations. Like Obama can't handle criticism, so his bootlickers have to protect him by screaming racism.

37, it seems the democrats don't want to talk about her Harvard hiring record either. From the liberal salon.com:

"She had hired 32 tenured and tenure-track academic faculty members (non-clinical, non-practice). But when we sat down to review the actual record, we were frankly shocked. Not only were there shockingly few people of color, there were very few women. Where were the people of color? Where were the women?"

You don't know any teabaggers, and you wouldn't know a racist if one bit you in the arse

==

You're right, I don't know any teabaggers and I fully intend to keep it that way. If someone in my acquaintance turned out to be one he would cease to be in my acquaintance at that moment. It's called freedom of association and I fully intend to exercise it, just as I did when I saw NAMBLA literature in the apartment of someone I knew.

And oh, I know a racist when I hear or see one. Who wouldn't? People who refer to the president as a ni66er, what, are you holding out for more evidence?

Maybe not everyone in TP is a sheet-wearing bigot but they can read the signs (OK, that may not be 100% true) that their fellows are holding and nobody is telling them to tone it down, so they're comfortable around bigotry. Want to split hairs there? Knock yourself out, but leave me out of it.

I grew up in Virginia, first moved there in ;'64. I know what a f ucking racist is.

Looking over the blog today, I was suprised at the deafening silence concerning the Obama adminstration's evident interest in revisiting that pesky Miranda decision as it applies to U.S. citizens suspected of terroism.

Yes. Same guys who voted for Medicare, and Social Security before that. Great programs, right?

"And yes, racist is a slur. What did you think it was, a compliment?"

No, but it would be nice if the term were a little more reality-based than, say, sh_thead or motherf____er, which in your usage it isn't. You don't know any teabaggers, and you wouldn't know a racist if one bit you in the arse.

Finance whiz. All you have done all day is attack others. Is there an opening in the stooge line up we haven't heard about? I concur that ddawd is clearly too stupid for even that role and loud and dumb has long been straightjacketed.

I think you will fit right in with curly and mo, I mean The Ped and drivl.

Finance whiz. All you have done all day is attack others. Is there an opening in the stooge line up we haven't heard about? I concur that ddawd is clearly too stupid for even that role and loud and dumb has long been straightjacketed.

I think you will fit right in with curly and mo, I mean The Ped and drivl.

obviously brigade has missed the plethora
of identical signs showing up at every TeaParty rally with the image of Obama
in whitemakeup, and swastikas, hitler mustaches, mao references and the words socialist emblazened upon them. Other disgusting TeaParty signs proudly cheering on the death of Ted Kennedy.
I presume brigade you are aware of that disgusting behavior and won't try and
rationalize it as some fringe malcontents.
And if the TeaParty deplores these signs
why aren't their speakers saying take them down immediately why don t wan that kind of garbage here?

Looking over the blog today, I was suprised at the deafening silence concerning the Obama adminstration's evident interest in revisiting that pesky Miranda decision as it applies to U.S. citizens suspected of terroism.

curious 37th why you waste everyone's
time with your c***? NO ONE CARES BUT YOU !

you post hate if the person being discussed
is hispanic, AA, Asian, indian, moslem,
atheist,gay, catholic, jewish, mormon...
have I forgotten anyone? you must live a
totally unhappy and miserable existence.

However the White House made a point a few weeks ago saying she wasn't "OPENLY GAY." But they did not go further and actually say whether she was GAY OR NOT.

Well, is she gay or not ????

She could be CLOSETLY GAY The public deserves to know - because this may affect her decisions. We should get a definitive statement. It is OFFENSIVE THAT THIS QUESTION HAS NOT BEEN ANSWERED - AND THERE MAY HAVE BEEN AN ATTEMPT AT DECEPTION ON THIS QUESTION.

Noacoler wrote,
"No the TP is not a huge movement. The gatherings are threadbare, nothing more than a dozen or two bearded smokers carrying around signs with misspelled racist slogans."

Here we go again. Are you here 12BarBlues?
Someone throwing "racist" as a slur again.

Noacoler's brain was evidently programmed using spaghetti code, which has resulted in all too frequent use of spaghetti logic.
You see, the old Jim Crow Democrats were not like Democrats of today. They were scum---like teabaggers, like Republicans.
That is until a couple of threads down the road, when discussion shifts to Medicare or Social Security; then you'll find that these very same Democrats are/were once again men of great courage and high principles, nothing at all like today's Republicans.

It is OFFENSIVE that the question has not been answered directly - all they said was Kagan was not "OPENLY GAY" - however IS SHE GAY OR NOT.

There may be a great deal of gay issues before the Court, including gay marriage - and whether first grade children should be taught about gay sex at a young age - which the gay community is pressing school districts to adopt as policy.

The public deserves to know. We know that Kagan led a GAY CRUSADE on "don't ask" at Harvard.

ask your g.m gabrielson what she thinks about Medicare Part D. It saved my mom over $3000
in prescription costs last year, likely
no big deal to a piker like you. Presumably your crowd would also like to end SS,Medicare, and the VA.
And apparently you believe that the Salt
Lake taxpayors need to be paying for
your e.r. visits b/c you are entitled
to refuse to pay your own HC premiums. You know its all about Liberty and what the founding fathers would want is to give you free H.C.
Apparently your crowd is convinced that if
they show up at your local E.R.uninsurred and receive care its totally free. You sound like just like all other ill informed political hacks, so crawl back in your Utah hole.
by the way have you bothered to read
Wyden-Bennett?

Watch out 37th. the Ped is going to take away your whole milk and substitute soy.

as you must already know, only your mother and neocolor knows what's best for you.

there will also be no smoking, no drinking, no coffee, no staying up late, no reading unless from the approved list, no peanut products, no soda, no tv, no Fox news, no greasy foods, and of course no thinking and no questions.

this is for your own good. now bend over and take it, as The Ped is so good at explaining.

Two years of the Utah jackazs will serve one purpose: hardening voter resolve to get rid of Republicans. Their teabagger will come to the Senate picking fights and wasting time with junk and always with the (R) on the TV screen.

gabrielson, you're a moron. You've hurt your state and you've hobbled the Senate. You're going to send a caveman to Washington and he's just going to waste everyone's time with stupid tangents about gays and abortion and taxes.

And spare us all the constitutional fig leaf and the BS about the founders. Maybe you and your cult church are still living in the 18th century but America is in the 21st.

I am one of the Utah state delegates that voted against Bennett on Saturday. I have never been to any "tea party" rallies. People want to make the delegates out as a bunch of wild eyed crazies. I thought the delegates were extremely well informed and understood the implications of what they were doing.

Regardless of whether Bennett is "conservative" or not, the country is headed for financial disaster and instead of hitting the brakes, Bennett has been stepping on the gas.

He has had 18 years to try and reduce entitlement spending and instead he voted to expand them with Medicare Part D. He says he supports the Constitution and limited government, but he proposed forcing every American to purchase health insurance. Personally, the TARP bailout did not factor into my vote much. In fact you didn't hear that mentioned hardly at all. TARP isn't going to add much of anything to the deficit, so besides some Constitutional issues, that wasn't a big deal for most of the delegates.

The delegates felt like the time has finally come to try something different.

I think we felt like the root cause of the problems our country is facing is a Federal government that is no longer the limited, restrained government that the founders set up in the Constitution. The founders created a system where almost all problems would be handled at the State level and the Federal government would just stick with the few things allocated to it in Article 1 Section 8.

Not as silly as excoriating Kagan for being "pro-gay." What planet does that crap sell magazines on? This is America, not Iran.

Really gotta wonder about these shutins. I see 37th sitting in the dark, all the windows spray-painted black, a rancid bottle of piss at his side, typing away and refreshing, smoking hit after hit of tina and pasting his posts into one thread after another.

Poor 37, everyone makes him wet his bed. black people, gay people, brown people, and let us say with certainty that, like zouk, he has no women in his life, except fantasy ones... I can imagine the life-sized posters on his bedroom walls.

No the TP is not a huge movement. The gatherings are threadbare, nothing more than a dozen or two bearded smokers carrying around signs with misspelled racist slogans. And to claim that they speak for a vast army of like-minded induhviduals who couldn't make it to the park that day is pure hogwash, more Silent Majority nonsense

WRT Sen Bennett - I am glad that someone mentioned this kind of thing has happened for years in Utah, the Tea Party state before there was a Tea Party!
I do not agree that Matheson will sail to victory in a primary. Many run of the mill Utah Democrats are ticked off about Jim's healthcare reform vote so they won't vote, period. The moderates (Independants and Republicans)who like Jim probably won't care enough or won't realize the importance of this primary so they won't come out to vote. Claudia's supporters, on the other hand, see a chance to be heard and will lead a massive, grass-roots get-out-the-vote effort. A number of the delegates, myself included, were first-time delegates who got involved specifically because of the grass-roots recruitment effort.
I am prediciting that Claudia will win the primary, and thus Utah Democrats have handed this seat over to the Republicans. Morgan Philpot will be the next Congressman from Utah's 2nd district.

The Tea Party wing of the Republican Party is a real problem for Republicans. (This is in addition to the underlying fundamentalist christian base) The hyperbole they use to espouse a broad range of sometimes mutually exclusive grievances will not track with independent moderates which hold the key to electoral victory in many states and nationally.

Making this tea party insurrection a Democratic Party problem is missing the fact it is incubating almost exclusively within the Republican Party because it is mainly comprised of Republicans angry at the prior election results, the economy and very mad they can do little about anything. According to estimates, the tea bag folks comprise 2% of the electorate and that to me speaks loads to the current state of commitment and philosophy in the Republican Party if such a group with such a disparate series of grievances can almost take over.

There are broad dissatisfactions across the country (that overlap with some of the tea party grievances) with the overall economic situation, and in particular with the unemployment picture. There is also a huge hangover with the housing bubble and a pent up consumer demand from the previously "real estate wealthy" Americans who will now have to get used to the long term reality of what it means to be a middle class American in the 21st century. The documented disparity between wealthy and all others is monstrous and will be hard to deal with even if it is finally seen as anti-democratic. It will be quite a hangover for both the Democrats and Republicans regardless of whether incumbents are punished or not. There is no easy solution and taxes will have to be discussed in a mature way unless we want to stay unhappy and angry.

Both political parties will have to navigate this reality with proposals that are appropriate, genuine and effective in rebalancing our national interests. Being against things just doesn't make for a motivating platform to run on or to govern from.

No, the tea party isn't formidable past its potential for physical intimidation. You're damned right it has no organization, what you fail to add is that it has no coherent goals. Just some arch and raised-eyebrow melodrama about you-just-wait-till-November.

The Bennett fallout? Utah will send a caveman to the US Senate, a guy who will hoot a howl and walk on his knuckles and waste everyone's time with junk about gays and abortion and taxes. It will hurt the state and it will slow the the Senate from doing the nation's business.

Most people are missing one particular point in electorate anger. Many of us are sick and tired of career politicians, people like Byrd and Kennedy, just to name two. This was not the way our government was supposed to work, but we got complacent and trusted those we elected to represent us (foolishly). It has become easier and easier to see that those politicians are not in their seats to serve us. While that may be true for a VERY scant few, the majority are there to serve themselves and "The party"and both political parties have completely lost touch with their bases.

The Tea Party, while it has no central management and no leadership, is a formidable tool for conservatives. It is a huge movement, for every person you see at the "gatherings" there are many, many more who are in agreement or sympathetic to their cause. When the people who belong to that movement tell you that "November is coming" I think everyone knows what they mean and even the leadership of the Republican party is beginning to understand that we just might use our great big broom and clean house!

Most people are missing one particular point in electorate anger. Many of us are sick and tired of career politicians, people like Byrd and Kennedy, just to name two. This was not the way our government was supposed to work, but we got complacent and trusted those we elected to represent us (foolishly). It has become easier and easier to see that those politicians are not in their seats to serve us. While that may be true for a VERY scant few, the majority are there to serve themselves and "The party"and both political parties have completely lost touch with their bases.

The Tea Party, while it has no central management and no leadership, is a formidable tool for conservatives. It is a huge movement, for every person you see at the "gatherings" there are many, many more who are in agreement or sympathetic to their cause. When the people who belong to that movement tell you that "November is coming" I think everyone knows what they mean and even the leadership of the Republican party is beginning to understand that we just might use our great big broom and clean house!

All incumbents are on notice: don't try to be reasonable, don't try to work with the other party to create good legislation, don't look for new solutions and don't use any of the personal skills or POV you have developed in your life. Your job is to stay in this Hallowed Rut we have walked in and we have thought in. Don't look over the edge of the Rut or we will cut you off.

"Republicans do not tolerate support for bailouts" except for Miss, Louisiana and Alabama.

Lindsey Graham, Bob Corker, Collins and Snowe
logically should be the next ones on their
purge list.

the first sane comment I have heard from McConnell in years.
"McConnell, a close personal friend of Bennett, also said that "Utah and the nation has lost an outstanding conservative Republican senator."

How should the D Party respond to the TeaParty
overwhelming the ranks of the GOP? Simple: Do everything to communicate to Libertarians and
Independents that the supposed big tent that
Michael Steale promised has totally collapsed
on the elephant. The GOP has become a single
issue/narrow party who's single overriding purpose is summarized by the constant posts of 37th.
Utter hatred of Obama, nothing more nothing less. An oil spill happens, blame Obama.
A terrorist event fails, blame Obama anyway.
The DOL announces 290,000 jobs were created
this month, blame Obama that it wasn't 300,000;
Bush and Paulson intelligently rescue us from dire economic consequences with a successful but unpopular Bailout which included partial nationalizing our banks, insurance
and auto companies, call Obama a socialist
and blame him for policies enacted in Dec 2008.

The GOP's bumper sticker language we are mad as hell and hate Obama, might sell to the 35%
of this country calling themseleves self identified Republicans, but that is certainly
not a winning message to deliver to independents this Nov. And that is all they got.

CC, you mentioned McConnell, but I was hoping to hear your thoughts in the implications in KY as well. With TEA support behind Rand Paul, and the party, including McConnell himself, thinking they can just name the next senator. Don't you think Utah can have an impact on Kentucky? (I do, but I'd like to know if I'm wrong.)

There has ALWAYS been a right wing of the Republican party which has wanted to pull the party further to the right - obviously the pendulum swings - and this year it is swinging in favor of that right wing.

The right wing is stronger in some places than others - a party convention in Utah - how much righer can a right wing be ?

I don't know why the moderates in BOTH parties are having a difficult time - what will happen is we will see some wild swings from the far left to the far right over the next few election cycles.

This isn't the first time Utah Republicans have done this. In 2000, they dumped Merrill Cook (though that was for numerous reasons), forced Mike Leavitt into a primary, and almost forced Orrin Hatch into one.